ac or civ2

[tomdy2k]

hi

i just blew 49.95 for ctp2. the game is hampered by the most passive ai i've ever seen. just plain weak.i've had civ2 for over a year and love it. what about smac and smax. they look fun but i've heard mixed reviews, also if anyone has had a positive experiance with ctp2 i'd love to know.


tom

[Helium Pond]

There are things I miss about Civ. Mostly the historical aspect, and how that worked. But when I try to play Civ2 now, I miss all the things that make SMAC great: the personalities and diplomacy between the leaders, the Social Engineering, etc. I think, if you give SMAC a chance, you will find the advancements in the game very addictive--in fact, essential.

[WhiteElephants]

Not to beat a dead horse but... I pretty much agree with what everyone has said here, though I too haven't played a lick of CtP. From what I hear about CtP, which is whatever trickles down through these boards, not too many people are happy with either release of the game. To me SMAC is an extension of Civ2 that took the game further and I hope to see it extended even further in Civ3. When I look at the CtP games I don't see an extension, I simply see a glossy version of Civ2.

[Wiglaf]

quote: i've heard mixed reviews

Really? Wonder where. Oh, about positive ctp2 experiances, check out ctp's forums or read some reviews. They actually aren't all bad.

[Lefty Scaevola]

You will love smac. In addition to being a superior game, you will become attached to the personalities of the factions and the story line (expande story available in multiple story sites on the web)

------------------
Gaius Mucius Scaevola Sinistra
Pontificator Pendanticus
older richer & wiser than you

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Tomdy2k,

I know not of either CTp or CTP2, but I can say with utmost convictionthat SMAC and it's sequel Alien Crossfire (SMACX) are by far the best TBS game since Civ2. To my mind SMAC(x) has taken everything I loved about Civ2 and added to it. Adding new complexities, new strategems, new AI factions that actually feel like they have some personality and agenda.

SMAC to my mind is the only successor to the CIv genre of games. (I say that fully knowing that I have not played one turn of CTP or CTP2). As such my comments are not really a knock 'gainst CTP or CTP2 but moreso a whole hearted endorsement of SMAC.

But as with all things it really is a matter of taste. If you want a game that is based in history, SMAC isn't for you. If you like SciFi SMAC will be more to your liking.

Inclosing I was a huge CIV2 addict, but since SMAC I've probably played CIV2 less than 4 hours inthe last 2 years. AS for SMAC, wellll.... lets just say I'm glassy eyed again this morning.

Og

[MarkG]

quote: ac or civ2?

after 20 or so months, coming to ac forum and asking if ac is better than civ2 is like asking if the sun shines (the same thing happens in the civ2 and ctp forums(although most people from the ctp forums are now in the ctp2 ones)) it is nearly certain that you wont find someone so "strange"(to not use other words) who will not like the game and still be here after all this time

perhaps looking at the older threads here or the archived ones in the ac-general archive would be better

[Sikander]

I loved Civ, and Civ 2 was good (but really more or less a very slight evolutionary step forward). I played my fill of them though. SMAC reminds me of the excitement of Civ. It is beautifully complex, and has even more gameplay potential than Civ did, with the factions having different attributes, and the complex social models. It is one of the best, if not the best of the Civ spinoffs (and I have played many of them into the ground). Here is a list of my favorite spinoffs in order of preference:

SMAC/X
Master of Magic
MOOII
Colonization
CIVII

The reason CIV II is rated so low is that it really wasn't all that different from Civ, and a lot of the improvements were things I didn't use like the scenario editor and the art. The AI was much improved, but by that time so was I.

[weird god]

here are my fav strategy-games:

1:CIV2....the best game ever - both single and multiplayer!
2:Heroes of Might&Magic3: not a civ-game but damn good
3:AC....excellent in single-player, bad for mp
4:Colonization....it´s quiet old and the unit limit is bad, but the game´s flair is amazing
5:MOO2:...nice and complex game though starting position decides the game
6:Imperialism: not a civ-game but i really like it, any ideas where i could get imp2?
7:CTP2: what a weak AI!
8:CTP: even less interesting
9:CIV1: i really loved it, but it´s not of any interest nowadays for me

------------------
god made weed.....you don´t really think he fails sometimes!?

weed god, chief of EUROPA
www.mutlispieler.de

[grimreap]

I don't own CTP or CTP2, but I think I will probably buy CTP as it is in the "bargain bins" for a tenner. I played a few turns (a couple of hours) of CTP at my uncle's house and was reasonably impressed, however the game was a bit too easy (although i was playing on the easiest setting, but i am talking in comparison to civ2 and SMAC/SMACX). To be quite honest I enjoy the historical aspect of the game, but I was slightly annoyed that the Wonder of world-type improvements didn't do what I thought they should, for example I can't remember the specific wonder but one from Civ2 had a completely different "bonus" in CTP than in Civ2, I found this difficult to get to grips with as, after playing Civ2 quite a bit i tend to beeline for certain wonders. In short, being so similar yet different made the game (for me), difficult to play (and enjoy).
SMAC on the other hand is an entirely different story, being set on Chiron the techs have to be completely new, i personally found this easier to pick up. SMAC is also a lot more challenging, and although can be infuriating I feel that it is a lot more rewarding.
In conclusion I think that considering the low price at the moment it is worth getting both, but I sure am glad that i got SMAC!

[grimreap]

sorry about the huge block of text, i should have paragraphed a bit more, heehee

[Tony]

I pretty much agree with Ogie and Helium. Civ 2 is awesome but AC is better. The story and characters are more engaging than Civ, and the Social Engineering of AC is a masterpiece. I still return to Civ occasionally though because building "the Longevity Vaccine" or some other high tech gobbeldy gook is not nearly as cool as building the Pyramids or the Great Wall of China.

If they made a sequel to Civ 2 that was as well thought out as AC, I'll have the best of both worlds, but until then AC has the best gameplay of any turn based strategy game.

[Misotu]

I have played CTP. Although it has some interesting ideas (like converting enemy cities to your religion, enslaving pop/units and commercial war) I have never played it again since I got into SMAC. I found many of the features that were new in CTP (as opposed the Civ games) didn't really work terribly well. The worst one, I think, was expansion into space (shudder). I quite liked the little battle screen though, and I preferred the idea of multiple units attacking simultaneously. (Hope I've remembered all this correctly - like I said, it's a *very* long time since I played CTP and I think I only played 2 or 3 games in total).

SMAC is harder than CTP to play well - but far more rewarding in my opinion. It is the faction personalities, the diplomacy and the complexity of the social engineering that really make the game.

[grimreap]

One thing nobody seems to have mentioned is the far improved (over civ and civ2) diplomacy, a much better choice of stuff to say.
Although it is annoying that yet again you can't do everything that the AI can (i.e ignore when faction contacts you, by this i mean that when a faction only contacts you to tell you to get off their land you always see the message and so must act on it to avoid damaged rep, AI doesn't).
This is nothing compared to how unfair Civ2's diplomacy could be tho.

[Misotu]

I mentioned it